They are angry, mean and can't have a civilized discussion with other believers without using cheap oh-I-think-I'm-so-smart barbs that aren't really that funny.
I really think they need god in their lives....maybe they'd be...oh I don't know...nice? less uptight?
2007-07-03 06:51:59 · 47 answers · asked by Jmyooooh 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
They aren't my representatives. They are simply big enough loudmouths to have gained some notoriety. There are quite a number of atheists who go about their lives not worshipping God and don't feel the need to ram it down other peoples' throats.
2007-07-03 06:55:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 2⤋
I'm sorry that Jerry Seinfeld turned down the job as the spokesman for Atheism.
Honestly, I'd probably be a pretty bitter guy if I did what they did. Trying to argue science and logic versus scripture is strenuous.
However, the arguement itself is never going to end. Atheists want the Religious to give scientific and logical evidence of a God's existance. The Religious want proof within the scripture directly saying god does not exist. To an Atheist, scripture is garbage. To the Religious, logic does not apply to everything.
It's a never ending battle.
2007-07-03 06:59:07 · answer #2 · answered by Ryan 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well that's because HEY WAIT JUST A MINUTE... they're not like the Pope you know, they're not elected, appointed or even anointed. They're just clever people with a gift for speech who are particularily interested in discussing Atheism.
I take it you don't really have a proper response to what Dawkins and Hitchens say, just how they choose to say it. Obviously, it's not funny to be made look ridiculous. Yet when you suggest to Dawkins that the world is 6,000 years old, that is exactly what you have allowed him to do to you.
I wonder what you would consider a civilized discussion. One where everyone agrees with you?
2007-07-03 07:12:46 · answer #3 · answered by ThePeter 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
As opposed to Jerry Falwell, The Bakers, and the other corrupt "representatives" of Christianity? Not all Atheists are passionless, joyless, or even apathetic, just as not all Christians are Evangelical ministers who have million dollar homes and cars. But hey, we can all play the generalizing game together!
Heck, I'm not even an atheist, I just think maybe Christianity would be better served keeping their noses in their business and Atheists keeping their noses in their own business too. Play nice, kids, or no more sandbox for you.
2007-07-03 06:57:30 · answer #4 · answered by necroth 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
The most selfish, rude, and disrespectful people I know are Christians.
So you can't just make assumptions that Atheists are mean people.
Everyone is different. There are many people that are like that. They just don't feel like showing emotion.
Who knows, maybe if everyone had an imaginary friend like you, and actually thought they were real could talk to them, they would be happier.
I get told by many people that I am the most sincere, intelligent, and respectful person they know.
-angry, mean, sad...Atheist
2007-07-03 06:59:00 · answer #5 · answered by Dr. Bradley 3 · 4⤊ 1⤋
They are not absolutely joyless. The only reason they seem that way is because the only time you see them is when they're talking about religion. I personally get the same way when talking to ignorant christians.
It's like if you were talking to a neo-nazi and trying to argue with them that their philosophy is wrong. I'm sure you'd get worked up and angry too.
2007-07-03 06:58:36 · answer #6 · answered by Kaze 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Who said these people are "representatives"? By that logic, you're saying I should assume Jerry Falwell speaks for all Christians.
If you're looking for atheists whose work can put a smile on your face, why not listen to Woody Allen, Penn & Teller, Julia Sweeney, David Cross, Douglas Adams, Tom Lehrer, Mickey Dolenz, Patton Oswalt, Eddie Izzard, Billy Connolly, Alan Cumming...
And by the way, Dawkins (it's not "Dawkings") managed to keep civilized in his conversation with Bill O'Reilly. If you can be civilized on THAT segment, you can be civilized with anybody.
2007-07-03 06:56:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 2⤋
It's frustrating to talk with religious people, because they always serve you illogical rethorics.
You want to know their oppinion about when they think simians stopped to be animals: 100 000 years ago or 4 million? They say: "God molded Adam from clay"
You want to know if they have a solution to stop war? They say: "God will punish the Evil islamists/christians/americans and we must aid in the cleasing!!!"
It's like trying to have a rational conversation with a raving mental patient.
2007-07-03 07:00:38 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Mamm, I have never heard of these two people. Please, don't preoccupy yourself with atheists. I have no desire to be "saved". I accept any philosophy of belief that does not endorse harmful occasion, and dogma. I am an atheist, and am certainly not angry about anything. Individual belief structure is exactly that: individual. I'm not uptight, but it seems to me you are. Go forward. There is no evidence that any belief philosophy represents fact. We are all subject to faith and conjecture.
2007-07-03 07:03:06 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
If you took the opportunity that Laptop gave you to watch O'Reilly with Dawkins I'd say Dawkins made O'Reilly look like a fool by not engaging him. Dawkins seemed perfectly comfortable and O'Reilly looked like his head was going to pop.
2007-07-03 07:07:26 · answer #10 · answered by Yogini 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋